Messages - sonofapickle

You place too much prospect into a piece of paper (degree, etc...) and less on actual education. That is the difference from you and I, I am a student of knowledge and wisdom, whereas you are some jackass of injurious indoctrination, entangled and hoodwinked by institutional opinions of what constitutes an actual education.

Yes, since giving you your god damn answer is so hard for your pee-brain to understand. If you are too incompetent(or just plain scared) to look bunnies up that is right out in the open, and people straight up tell you where to look, you will FAIL legalresearch and writing(if you even get to that point)

Have fun, working as a legal secretary somewhere after you fail out, dumbass.

Your response is rather idiotic since doing actual legal research and responding to a simple question with no monetary value are completely different. You shot yourself in the foot by enlisting in slippery slope logic and vague analogies.

Quote

Reading and memorizing aren't what law school teaches you, so whatever dude. Your assessment that law school is like an undergrad history course is inaccurate and, frankly, irresponsibly dangerous. It is nothing like history class. The ability to read and digest complex material is great - but, correct me if I'm wrong, you haven't sat for a single law school exam and are therefore completely ignorant and out of line for pretending you know better.

Your main points are as followings:

(1) "law is difficult to master for all..."

(R) That is a generalization. Law is, in fact, easier for some and difficult for others to grasp. Laws, regulations, and statutes change and those same laws require successive interpretation of that specific law. A person who can grasp and remember material in the legal field is more successful than others because, on average, that same person is more likely to grasp difficult concepts in the field of law. It is not just about memorizing and read coherently, but it has an additional attribute to it as well, "how well can you interpret and defend your position coherently and successively?" Your generalization of everyone's competencies is not correct.

(2) "actual law firm lawyers perceive the arrogant one's as fools"

(R) A person who does not stand up for himself and is always quiet is more of a coward and a fool. The trust issue is also entirely wrong. People know exactly where I stand. If I am arrogant, then I have something to be arrogant about. I have made more friends due to my own personality. They find it easier to talk with me due to my own nature. Even lawyers find my company more enjoyable and attitude more respectable. I learn by observing, asking questions, remembering, listening effectively, and analyzing the information I receive to come to the best of answers based on how I view it. Now look! If every student behaved or studied as the aforementioned listing, then they would be A+ students. I have a system and it has worked so far. Your own world view is not tantamount to everyone's world view and thought process. You perpetuate an arrogant attitude.

(3) "life will teach you humility..."

(R) I know when to hold my tongue and when to speak my mind. The people who are more well versed than I am in a certain field, I respect. Whereas, with peers, I don't care who you are and you know little to what I know on it. As for the law, I am particularly well versed in the law of my state and more on codes since I had to take a test concerning most laws in my field of study. I don't care if peers have their feelings hurt because I said some perceived "callous" remark towards them. Grow up and learn that life is a female dog. That is the problem with people today, they are weak and overly sensitive. Get over yourself, you are not entitled to anything in this life nor my respect if I don't feel like giving it.

I am not those people. I have a natural disposition to grasp material that seems hard to everyday people and apply it rather quickly, or in other words, learn it quicker than other people. People call that genius and people like that are generally categorized as genius' because of that ability. Their minds work faster and operate at higher levels. I don't necessarily label myself as such but I would be considered one. I can read an average 200 page (not some idiotic, simpleton novel either, I am making reference to Soren) novel in one night or a little above an hour. Then again, I've been reading books all of my life so reading fast possibly has a small percentage pertaining to level of operation of the brain. Text books which are 800 pages generally take me a week to get through if I am trying to grasp, not all of it, but the core concepts of each chapter/section.

@pace: I am not reading about law school, I am reading about law in general that is taught in law school. I am basically getting the same information you are getting or learning the same material. There was one law student here a few months ago who was a 2L and I knew more about the law and could interpret it better than him. I basically gave the guy a free lesson on the law. He knew close to little of what I know. I don't have to be in law school to know more than you, I read more text books, can grasp material faster, and know actual people who are lawyers. The only difference between me and you is the age gap and the fact that you are in law school. However, that has little bearing on you being more well-versed than myself on the law.

I am wondering why people believe law school is hard? I read some of the editions of books students read in law school and was thinking, "this is rather easy to not only grasp but remember as well." People are just making law school seem hard when it is actually like an undergrad history course. Grasp and retain most of the information and get an easy A. Try completing any mathematics beyond linear Algebra and applied mathematics and then tell me how hard it is to stay at an A average in law school.

Don't listen to the guy above. Ultimately, you need to pull down a few semesters (3 1/2) to up your GPA to a 3.5, but you will need to have a 3.7-4.0 GPA, so make mostly A's and one B. It will be hard but you can still pull it up towards a 3.5, and if you don't like your GPA still, take another semester of college and go for a minor in areas you studied more in to increase the GPA. That is what I would do if I wanted to go to a good law school. However, if you are a minority, all you need is a 3.5, a good personal statement, some reccomendations, and an LSAT of 165 or better to get into an actual good school. My friend, who is African American, was accepted into one of the top 10 law schools with a 3.5 UGPA + 170 LSAT. If you aren't a minority, well, good luck.

You have two years left and 4 semesters + summer school to get your GPA up. That is why I told you not to listen to the guy above, he talks as if you are done and can't do anything about it. You can and you should at least try to better your record. Work a bit harder than those around you and you will do fine.

I laughed when I saw a virtual support group. I have no need as I am fully prepared. I took two tests this past week, with the conditions of the LSAT, and scored two 180s. I am fully prepared and I am going to relax for the next month and a half, then I will freshen up on the skills I already have a well enough grasp on, which is all of them, and ace the LSAT. If you have been studying like me and have the intellectual capacity, the LSAT would seem like some 3rd grade mathematics test.

I might be two dollars into debt after law school, which is just my best estimation. My parents have said if I get into a top 10, they will pay for me to attend law school fully + room board and extra money on the side. With all of the studying I have been doing, I will get into one of the top 1-5 law schools. Harvard, Stanford, or Yale are a given with my record. I finished writing up everything that is needed to apply and my GPA is in good standing and I am a member of summa cum laude added with volunteer service, internship, recommendations from actual big law lawyers, professors, and the dean of my college, I won't have any problem getting into the top 3 law schools. Writing all of that just hit me like a bullet. I did a lot of work and am seeing the payoff.

To answer your question, you clearly have no understanding. I would say law is not for you but I see that you are young and ignorant, so I will tell you what you need to know, make a smart decision. Whether you know it or not is your problem. I would never ask for the advice of people because, ultimately, I am in control of my own life. My decisions are the best ones and if I ask someone else that means I simply have no clue what I should be doing in the first place. The question you, tryinlawschool, asked, was stupid.

I would rather get this topic on a different note and address a post that was made on the first page.

Quote

Obviously, Harvard will open more doors, but law school is really what you make of it.

I know I detest tier 4 schools and schools like Cooley, but anyone attending those schools could get into big law. It would be a much different route than say, a kid graduating from the top 5. A student who was in a tier 4 would actually have to work a few years as a lawyer, gain experience, make a lot of rapport with some wealthy people, and finally, make a name for himself in the field of law. It would take a while but it would also garner more experience and possibly a better suited lawyer for biglaw than some students who do graduate from top law schools.

My uncle who works in a big law firm always says, school name only matters when you first graduate law school and pass the bar exam. If you have been out in the field for 5-10 years, your school name doesn't matter anymore and experience, reputation, and network matters more.

If you are going to become a lawyer, then you really need to become a bit more educated on the basics.

White and Black can be considered colors under certain circumstances, and can be considered, "non-colors" under other circumstances. There is really no direct clause that would state, "white is not and will never be a color," or, "black is not and will never be a color." I'd suggest looking into the additive color theory. Black, according to science tends to have the need to suck up all of light (or color) and reflect none back (retina or vision), which is an example of a non-color. White is a combination of a lot of colors and it reflects light back which is an example of a color (also vision or caused by the retina of the human eye). Black is created by a mixture of a lot of colors, but it would not be pure black just a different variation of black, a lighter tone. That is just the breadth of it.

Are white people a people of color? Yes, they are a people of color. I think it boarders the lines of racism or downright prejudicial when people form such groups. However, soon whites will be the minority so those types of organizations will become nonexistent all together due to the racial coating they tend to have.